|
Post by maximus on Apr 18, 2008 0:49:35 GMT
Returning for a moment to Asar (Osiris), because of his association with the moon, Asar represents the repeating rhythm of natural life as demonstrated in seasonal and lunar cycles. In Egypt, the soil itself is considered the body of the Neter (god, for lack of a better word), which is constantly renewing the life that springs from it. The Egyptians called thier land Khem (the black land), the Arabs later called it Al Khemi (from whence we get our word "alchemy"). The image of Asar in this context was the "Black Neter," unsown and unrealised in the land. The "Green Neter" was his transformation, having undergone the repetition of genesis, growth,fruition, decay, and latency. Thus, Asar embodies the greatest power in creation: the function of germination.
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Apr 18, 2008 0:53:01 GMT
>One can thereby relate anything to anything else, on the basis of any colour.
Quite so
Now how do we test the speculated connection?
Or are we doomed to endless philosophising?
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Apr 18, 2008 0:53:51 GMT
>Asar represents the repeating rhythm of natural life
Quite so
But did Asar think that himself
Or did some helpful priests decide that later?
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Apr 18, 2008 0:58:59 GMT
>One can thereby relate anything to anything else, on the basis of any colour.
Quite so
Now how do we test the speculated connection? Discrimination and reason.
|
|
|
Post by maat on Apr 18, 2008 1:16:45 GMT
It was only years later that I read that each chakra radiates the whole spectrum and the designated colours change depending on the point of viewing. So one does not even have to limit one's self to particular shades of violet, indigo, blue, green, yellow, orange or red!!
Woo! Woo! It's open slather!? [/quote] No. I have taken it to mean that as one is shown in Tree of Life studies, Kether, the Crown, is fully present in Malkuth as well. Malkuth contains within inself a 'miniature' or 'lesser' version of the the whole tree. Likewise with the chakra system. Maat
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Apr 18, 2008 1:27:46 GMT
Woo! Woo! It's open slather!? No. I have taken it to mean that as one is shown in Tree of Life studies, Kether, the Crown, is fully present in Malkuth as well. Malkuth contains within inself a 'miniature' or 'lesser' version of the the whole tree.
Likewise with the chakra system.As I said, 'Woo! Woo! It's open slather!?'
If anything is anything then, 'Friday because foot' (Hey, at least they both begin with 'F')
|
|
|
Post by maat on Apr 18, 2008 3:15:26 GMT
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Apr 18, 2008 3:22:02 GMT
|
|
|
Post by maat on Apr 18, 2008 5:13:54 GMT
If planets similar in size to Jupiter or Saturn had their version of human beings upon them I wonder how tall (or long) they would be. Does the relative size of our world have an influence on the size of it's inhabitants? Giants would not cope with strong gravity: They would be crushed under their own weight. So they might be smaller than us? There are some anomolous places on Earth when the stones defy gravity. Can't remember why - will see if I can find some stuff on them.
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Apr 18, 2008 7:30:09 GMT
>There are some anomalous places on Earth when the stones defy gravity.
" Spook Hill - Lake Wales, Fl. Located between Orlando and Tampa, this stretch of road off Hwy. 27 is said to have gravity-defying effects on cars. The phenomenon on the sloping road is so well known that there is a sign on the roadside explaining its legend:................... but drivers do attest that when they stop their cars at a certain spot and shift their transmissions into neutral, the cars do seem to roll up the incline of the road."
As far as giants being crushed by their own weight that may well be possible - unless they have stronger bones.
And it is not necessary for all beings to live on the surface of the planet. Obviously the gravity is less the further beneath the surface
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Apr 18, 2008 7:39:07 GMT
>I have taken it to mean that as one is shown in Tree of Life studies, Kether, the Crown, is fully present in Malkuth as well. Malkuth contains within inself a 'miniature' or 'lesser' version of the the whole tree.
Obviously it is true then that in every sephiroth can be found colours that resonate with all the other sephira. This does not make them the same colours - but related.
From a practical point of view it can be difficult using those subtle shadings in an experiential sense to distinguish Tipharet in Yesod from Yesod in Tipharet. Thus I find the colour variations difficult to use accurately in the diagnostic aspects of inner work
I find a numerical system better as the numbers can be used more rapidly and precisely in measurement.
Also the resonances are predictable directly. Resonances are used to gain "leverage" or access, or to provide hypotheses as to the origin of impacts
Cheers
Russell
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Apr 18, 2008 9:11:38 GMT
>There are some anomalous places on Earth when the stones defy gravity.
" Spook Hill - Lake Wales, Fl. Located between Orlando and Tampa, this stretch of road off Hwy. 27 is said to have gravity-defying effects on cars. The phenomenon on the sloping road is so well known that there is a sign on the roadside explaining its legend:................... but drivers do attest that when they stop their cars at a certain spot and shift their transmissions into neutral, the cars do seem to roll up the incline of the road."
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Apr 18, 2008 9:57:00 GMT
"Obviously the gravity is less the further beneath the surface"
Is that correct Bro Russell? I thought that Gravity was subject to the Inverse Square Law and the strength decreased the further one was from its source. If that is the case and the planet has a liquid metal core then would the force of Gravity not be higher at the centre?
As for Giants etc the bones of the dinosaurs seem solid enough and must have been able to support their massive weight. I do know that one of the reasons why a whale usually dies if beached is that it collapses under its weight as it is not supported by water. I also read that assuming hominids could survive on massive planets such as Jupiter they would be small and squat whereas on a low gravity planet they would be taller than on Earth.
No doubts some of the Scientific types who post here will be able to correct me if I am wrong.
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Apr 18, 2008 10:07:48 GMT
>I thought that Gravity was subject to the Inverse Square Law
as far as I know
>the strength decreased the further one was from its source
But what is the source?
If you were at the centre of the Earth would the gravitational force be greatest or least?
>If ...............the planet has a solid metal core
You are getting into some interesting territory there. The common theory is liquid core. But that has various problems, not the least being that the poles are not on the axis of rotation - hence the magnetic field cannot be caused by circulation of a liquid core.
Best to be agnostic on the structure of the Earth.
>assuming hominids could survive on massive planets such as Jupiter they would be small and squat
There may turn out to be more forces in existence than gravity. If so then gravity may not be the primary determinant of body shapes. For example, if gravity were the dominant factor, humans would walk on 4 limbs to spread the load and lower the centre of gravity
Cheers
Russell
|
|
Tamrin
Member
Nosce te ipsum
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by Tamrin on Apr 18, 2008 10:27:54 GMT
Best to be agnostic on the structure of the Earth. The devil is in the detail.
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Apr 18, 2008 10:35:36 GMT
"For example, if gravity were the dominant factor, humans would walk on 4 limbs to spread the load and lower the centre of gravity"
According to the Darwinians, didn't we do just that?
I have corrected my error regarding the Earth's core which indeed would be likely to be liquid given the pressure etc.
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Apr 18, 2008 10:58:54 GMT
>likely to be liquid given the pressure etc.
Generally increased pressure makes a substance denser. Normally solids are denser than liquids. Thus a high pressure inside the Earth would produce a solid core.
But we have lava in the top few miles of the Earth so we will assume a liquid core some 4 000 miles below the lava
Until someone manages to drill a hole down 4 000 miles we won't actually know for sure about the structure of the Earth.
>According to the Darwinians, didn't we do just that?
I thought the Darwinian idea was that man evolved from things that were on 4 legs.
Why would evolution move to a less strong and less stable arrangement?
Cheers
Russell
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Apr 18, 2008 11:17:18 GMT
No, as far as I understand them the Darwinians say that the land animals from which we are supposed to have developed were quadrupeds which then "evolved" into bipeds. This is supposed to be part of the reason we have back problems as our spine was originally meant to be a ridge pole as in a tent and not a flagpole with a heavy weight, the skull, at the top. I'm not saying I believe that of course, just that this is what "they" say.
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Apr 18, 2008 11:33:57 GMT
>This is supposed to be part of the reason we have back problems
Other weaknesses are:
- eyes that don't work well in bright sunlight - eyes that don't work well at night - skin that burns in the sun - bodies that need clothes in both hot and cold climates - the young of the species cannot care for themselves for more than a decade - bodies that are weak compared with similarly sized animals
Perhaps evolution does not really explain the human.
|
|
|
Post by lauderdale on Apr 18, 2008 11:57:15 GMT
Perhaps evolution does not really explain the human.
My thoughts exactly!
|
|